CRE Comments On OMB Data Quality Peer Review Proposal Emphasize That Guidance Is Necessary
In the Data Quality legislation Congress directed OMB to provide guidance to federal agencies that would "ensure and maximize" the information they disseminate. In the case of scientific and technical information, guidance on satisfactory peer review is essential for fulfilling this legal responsibility. CRE identified peer review as an essential element of Data Quality in its legislative working papers which it gave to Congress in 1997 and which it has made public on this website for several years.

Comments On OMB Peer Review Guidelines Available On CRE WebsiteThe Office of Management and Budget solicited public comment on its proposed guidelines establishing peer review standards for federal agencies. The comment period for non-government entities ended December 15, 2003. These comments are now available on the CRE website. Federal agencies have another month to submit comments.

Major Law Firm Concurs With CRE On Applicability of Data Quality Act to Universities
The distinguished law firm McKenna, Long and Aldridge, acting at the request of the American Council on Education, has supported CRE's view on the applicability of the Data Quality Act to universities. Specifically, the firm concurred with CRE's view that, "it would be in the self interest of universities to make sure that information they submit to federal agencies meets DQA standards, thus enhancing the likelihood that federal agencies will publish the information..." McKenna, Long and Aldridge also concurred with CRE's view that the Data Quality Act in no way restricts the ability of universities to produce and disseminate information. As a member of CRE's Board of Advisor's noted, "universities can write whatever they want... If universities want their research to be used by the government, they will have to comply with the Data Quality Act, but that doesn't mean that there is a legal obligation to do so."

CRE's Data Quality Act Petition Causes International Debate
On September 8, 2003, CRE filed a petition with HHS claiming that WHO studies must meet Data Quality Act standards before they can be used to develop HHS' 2005 Dietary Guidelines. CRE's Petition is based in part on the Data Quality Act's pre-dissemination review requirements. An article published by Inside Washington Publishers discusses the international reaction to CRE's Petition. According to the article, international scientists view the petition "as another industry effort to weaken federal regulations by 'bullying' scientific institutions " like WHO. The article correctly provides CRE's different point of view: international studies must meet the same quality standards as domestic studies if federal agencies are to use them. CRE's position has been reinforced by a recent statement by NHTSA. The article points out that this debate is likely to expand to other contexts such as the use of IARC studies at Superfund Sites.

NHTSA Advises Public That Rulemaking Comments Must Meet Data Quality Act Standards
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration now correctly advises the public that any comments on NHTSA's proposed rules must meet Data Quality Act Standards before NHTSA can use or rely on the comments. NHTSA explains in its proposed rulemaking to amend Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 208: "Please note that pursuant to the Data Quality Act, in order for substantive data to be relied upon and used by the agency, it must meet the information quality standards set forth in the OMB and DOT Data Quality Act guidelines. Accordingly, we encourage you to consult the guidelines in preparing your comments." 68 FR 46539, 46542 n.4 (Aug. 6, 2003). CRE believes that all federal agencies subject to the Data Quality Act should provide similar advisories in their proposed rulemaking notices.

Law Firm Files Data Quality Act Petition Related To Asbestos Litigation
The law firm Morgan, Lewis & Bockius (MLB) filed a Data Quality Act Request for Correction with EPA regarding EPA's "Guidance for Preventing Asbestos Disease Among Auto Mechanics" (the Gold Book). This EPA document provides guidance to auto mechanics on the hazards of asbestos exposure during auto repair, and on how to avoid the hazards, in particular during brake repair. MLB asks EPA to discontinue any further dissemination of the Gold Book, and to "notify the public, through EPA's website or otherwise, that the Gold Book is outdated from a scientific and regulatory perspective." MLB argues that the Gold Book violates Data Quality Act Standards because it relies on inadequate/inappropriate data and literature; because it is outdated; and because its preparation, funding, review and approval are undocumented and cannot be verified or evaluated. Several juries have relied heavily on the Gold Book in awarding large verdicts to plaintiffs claiming injury from asbestos exposure during brake repair. MLB's Request for Correction is important because it is one of the first uses of the Data Quality Act with regard to information that has been introduced as expert evidence in litigation. EPA as not yet responded to MLB's Request for Correction.

CRE Challenges Federal Use of WHO Dietary Study, Emphasizes International Scientific Studies Must Comply With Data Quality Act and Guidelines
CRE has filed a Request for Correction of Information contained in a World Health Organization (WHO) Report. Both USDA and HHS have stated an intent to base their 2005 Dietary Guidelines, in part, on a WHO Report. Before USDA and HHS are legally able to rely on any of the data and analyses contained in WHO Technical Report 916, the agencies must conduct a Data Quality pre-dissemination review to ensure that all information used by the agency fully complies the U.S. Government's Data Quality standards. The pre-dissemination review process needs to include participation by all stakeholders. Subsequent to the review, USDA and HHS or WHO may need to supplement the WHO Report with corrections before the agencies will be able to base policy guidance on any information, including recommendations, contained in the Report.

CRE Commends New EPA Data Quality Assessment Factors
EPA's Science Policy Council recently published "A Summary of General Assessment Factors for Evaluating the Quality of Scientific and Technical Information." This important new document constitutes EPA's "effort to enhance the transparency about EPA's quality expectations for information that is voluntarily submitted to or generated by the Agency for various purposes." EPA's Assessment Factors document in particular clarifies the Data Quality standards that apply to EPA's use of models. CRE sent Dr. Paul Gilman, EPA Science Advisor, a letter complimenting the Agency "on an excellent piece of work which will have a significant impact on the timely and efficient implementation of the Data Quality Act."

CRE Recommends that University Policies Apply Data Quality Standards to Faculty Submissions to Agencies
University faculty members and other personnel often submit comments and information to federal agencies with the specific intent to influence policies, regulatory actions, or information they disseminate to the public. CRE has recently noted instances in which university personnel have submitted comments to agencies containing demonstrably inaccurate or biased information, and identifying themselves by their university position. CRE's August 6, 2003 letter to universities and their national organizations recommends that they remind faculty and other personnel that along with their special status in the community comes a responsibility to be intellectually honest, accurate, and unbiased in such communications, and that this responsibility is spelled out in the federal Data Quality guidelines. CRE also recommends that they review their policies and consider expressly incorporating the standards of the Data Quality guidelines.

EPA conducted a three-day Science Advisory Panel on atrazine's endocrine effects on amphibians: i.e., frogs. CRE's comments on the SAP reiterated the points made in CRE's Data Quality Act Petition on this issue. First, EPA cannot regulate atrazine for wildlife endocrine effects until there are accurate, reliable and reproducible tests for such effects. Second, there are no such tests at this time. EPA agrees with these points based on its response to CRE's DQA Petition and based on EPA's White Paper for the SAP. The SAP's review of this issue is important because it may be the first SAP review of test reproducibility and reliability issues under the Data Quality Act. The SAP's report on this issue should be out by the end of July.

On May 19, two academic members of the Center for Progressive Regulation wrote to EPA Administrator Whitman and OIRA Administrator Graham complaining that CRE was attempting to misuse the DQA when it filed comments with EPA rebutting comments on a biosolids rulemaking submitted by NRDC and a Cornell University project director. They alleged that the CRE comments constituted a DQ "complaint" which was an attempt to "quell scientific debate" and "pick-off" or "censor" comments "outside the normal confines of the rulemaking process." The CPR letter also argued at length that both OMB and CRE have misinterpreted the DQA as applying to information disseminated as part of rulemaking proceedings. The CRE response explains how the CPR assertions are inaccurate and reflect a misunderstanding of the CRE comments and the Data Quality legislation and guidance.

Einstein's Lectures on Electricity and Magnetism Demonstrate the Role of Data Quality and Transparency in Illuminating Complex Subject Matter

Lecture notes by Albert Einstein for a course on electricity and magnetism demonstrate that careful attention to Data Quality and transparency are essential for disseminating information about complex scientific issues. However, the lectures also demonstrate that, when requisite care is given to Data Quality, even difficult topics become accessible to a wider audience, thus expanding the ability of stakeholders to participate in the discussion. The following quote concerning continuously distributed electricity, following a discussion of the generalized form of Gauss's theorem, provides a lucid example of how Einstein carefully dealt with the use of assumptions. "So far we have assumed that electricity is unalterably bound to small bodies (treated as points). But the character of experience favors the assumption that electricity is spatially distributed. We must generalize our investigations in this sense." (p.6)

OMB Urged to Include DOT's Data Quality Guidelines In Regulatory Analysis Guidelines
CRE recommended OMB include the statistical portion of DOT's Data Quality guidelines in OIRA's government-wide regulatory analysis guidelines. CRE advocates use of these statistical guidelines (Appendix A of the DOT Data Quality guidelines) by all agencies in their regulatory analyses because the guidelines constitute a "best practice" that promotes transparency throughout the analytic process. The guidelines also contain analytic principles for employing sound statistical methods, identifying and correcting errors, and ensuring clarity of work products. CRE's comments were in response to OMB's request for comment on their Draft 2003 Report to Congress on the Costs and Benefits of Federal Regulations.

The Data Quality Act Applies to Rulemakings
There recently has been discussion in several contexts as to whether the Data Quality Act in general, and its administrative correction process in particular, apply to information disseminated by agencies during rulemakings. CRE examined this issue during OMB's and the agencies' development of Data Quality Guidelines. Based on the text of the Data Quality Act, the relevant legislative history, and common principles of statutory construction, the Act and the administrative correction process clearly do apply to rulemakings and to all other information publicly disseminated by agencies subject to the Act. CRE's memorandum on this issue can be accessed below.

CRE Raises Data Quality Act Issues in EPA's PFOA Review
EPA solicited public comment on the Agency's proposed negotiation of Environmental Consent Agreements (ECAs) requiring additional testing for Perfluoroctanoic Acid (PFOA). EPA's Federal Register notice explained that one of the primary purposes of these ECAs is to develop data necessary to perform a PFOA risk assessment. EPA acknowledges that the development of these data will require accurate and reliable tests for many different media. CRE's comments stressed the Data Quality Act requirements for these tests. In particular, CRE emphasized the need for validating reproducible tests for PFOA in human and animal blood. The Data Quality Act requires validation of these tests before EPA can disseminate PFOA risk information based on human or animal blood levels. There currently are no validated PFOA blood tests that have been demonstrated to be reproducible among different laboratories.

CRE Files Comments on ESA Consultation
EPA, the Fish and Wildlife Service, and the National Marine Fisheries Service sought public comment on how to improve their consultations regarding pesticides under the Endangered Species Act. CRE's comments on this Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking emphasized two points. First, all ESA determinations must be based on accurate and reliable data and are subject to the Data Quality Act. Second, EPA should be the lead agency in the consultation process.

EIA Sets the Standard for Data Quality Act Compliance
CRE recently had the pleasure of visiting the Energy Information Administration's website: http://www.eia.doe.gov/. This website is a model of how to disseminate information in a user-friendly manner that complies with both the letter and spirit of the Data Quality Act. In addition to publishing its own Data Quality Act Guidelines, EIA also revised its Standards Manual to conform to the new Data Quality Act standards. This remarkable Standards document states clear and essential requirements for insuring data quality. For example, with regard to the difficult issue of model validation, EIA's Standards Manual specifies in detail the steps necessary before the model can be used. Documentation of these steps is required to be placed on EIA's website for every model. EIA's Standards Manual also imposes rigorous requirements before any proprietary models are used.

Seafood Company Files Data Quality Act Petition with FWS
According to a Portland Press Herald article dated April 17, 2003,
Fjord Seafood filed a Data Quality Act petition with FWS and the
National Marine Fisheries Service challenging listing of Maine's
wild Atlantic Salmon under the Endangered Species Act. Among other
arguments, Fjord's Petition claims that the Services withheld from
the public information critical to the listing. Several environmental
groups, including the U.S. Public Interest Research Group, the Maine
Chapter of the Sierra Club and the Conservation Law Foundation, have
filed oppositions to the Petition. To the best of CRE's knowledge,
this is the first Data Quality Act petition that has been formally
opposed by third parties.

ABA Panel Predicts Major Data Quality Act Issues
On October 17, 2002, the ABA's section of Administrative Law and Legislative Practice held an Administrative Law Conference that included a panel discussion on "Learning to Live With the Data Quality Act." This very balanced panel included proponents of the Act (including CRE's own Jim Tozzi); opponents of the Act; and OMB officials charged with administering the Act. At the time of the panel, no Data Quality Act petitions had yet been filed. Yet, the panel and public comments remarkably predict two of the major issues raised by subsequently filed Data Quality Act Petitions: i) reproducibility of influential scientific information; and ii) application of the Petition process to ongoing public comment proceedings. The panel transcript is a valuable resource in understanding the Data Quality Act and its potential impacts on the administrative process.

CRE, in First-Ever Use of Data Quality Guidance for Third Party Submissions, Issues Rebuttal to NRDC Comments on EPA Biosolids Proposal
In its Watchdog Watch role, CRE has sent supplemental comments to EPA which warn that the NRDC comments on its draft risk assessment for land-applied biosolids cannot be used because, under both the OMB and EPA Data Quality guidance, they contain substantial inaccuracies, omissions, and biases, and lack reproducibility. The NRDC comments argued that the draft risk assessment under-estimated risks from dioxin and related compounds.

DOT's Data Quality Guidelines Set Benchmark Standard for Pre-Dissemination Review
An important component of the Data Quality Act is the requirement for agencies to initiate review processes for ensuring the data disseminated to the public meets the standards promulgated pursuant to the Data Quality Act. This pre-dissemination review takes place throughout the development and analysis of information disseminated by an agency. By effectively ensuring that disseminated information meets data quality standards, the agency will minimize the use of "requests for correction" after data is disseminated. DOT's Data Quality Guidelines have established a benchmark for pre-dissemination review that should serve as a model for other agencies. In particular, the DOT guidelines establish: 1) rigorous and detailed statistical principles and guidelines; and 2) the positive duty of the Department to consult with stakeholders on Data Quality issues.

EPA Administrator Announces New Transparency Program for Environmental Models
In a February 7 memorandum, EPA Administrator Whitman established a new program to ensure greater transparency and reliability for EPA's environmental models. EPA's Council for Regulatory Modeling (CREM), EPA's Science Advisor and the Science Policy Council will take the lead in this program. Among other laudable actions, this program will "make publicly accessible an inventory of EPA's most frequently used models, which will include information on a model's use, development, validation, and quality assessment." Administrator Whitman's memorandum identifies the new Data Quality Act as one of the reasons for this program. CRE applauds EPA's action.

EPA Acts on Atrazine Data Quality Petition
EPA has announced its position on atrazine's purported endocrine effects on wildlife in response to the Data Quality Act Petition filed in November by the Triazine Network, the Kansas Corn Growers Association and CRE. This Petition argued that EPA's FIFRA/FQPA Environmental Risk Assessment for atrazine violated both EPA's own DQA Guidelines and Government-wide ICCVAM guidelines by concluding that atrazine causes endocrine effects in frogs and other wildlife when there are no validated tests for those effects. EPA concluded that the Agency's ecological risk assessment "does not suggest that endocrine disruption...be regarded as an regulatory endpoint at this time."

EPA-CRE Disagreement on the Use of Unvalidated Tests
The Bureau of National Affairs (BNA) reported on a speech made
by an EPA policy official in which he stated that the agency could
utilize unvalidated tests as a basis for rulemaking. CRE argues that
preventing federal government reliance on unvalidated data is precisely
the reason that the Data Quality Act was enacted.

Status Of Data Quality Act Petitions
In addition to the three earlier filed Petitions, BMW filed a new Data Quality Act Petition requesting correction of information on several EPA data bases regarding BMW's RCRA compliance. EPA has also initially denied the Chamber of Commerce's Petition. While there has been no formal response to the four Senators' Petition, Administrator Whitman has sent them a discouraging letter regarding it.

The first Petition requested that EPA's IRIS listing for barium be revised. EPA initially denied this Petition on January 30, 2003. The Petitioner Chemical Products Corporation can now file an administrative appeal.

The second Petition, filed by CRE and agricultural groups, requested correction of EPA's FIFRA/FQPA environmental risk assessment for atrazine to clarify that there can be no reliable data on atrazine's purported endocrine effects on wildlife until there are properly validated tests for such effects. On January 30, 2003, EPA sent Petitioners a letter which said that EPA will respond to their Petition in EPA's atrazine interim IRED. The IRED, which became available on February 20, granted much of the relief sought by the Petition. The Petitioners are the Triazine Network, the Kansas Corn Growers Association and CRE.

The Chamber of Commerce filed a petition seeking correction of the minutes for an EPA SAB meeting held on October 1, 2002. In a letter dated March 5, 2003, EPA initially denied the Chamber's Petition on the ground that the SAB was not subject to the Data Quality Act.

The Competitive Enterprise Institute has filed Data Quality Petitions with NOAA and OSTP related to global climate change. The CEI Petitions seek withdrawal of the National Assessment on Climate Change, which is the inter-agency technical document that underlies most of the federal Government's recent statements about global climate change.

Four US Senators have also filed a petition to EPA regarding NPDES for Oil and Gas Construction Activity. EPA has not formally acted yet on the Senators' Petition. However, in a letter dated March 7, 2002, Ambassador Whitman disagreed with most of the flawed data arguments in their Petition. EPA has also published the final rule in question, and the Senators' Petition had requested that the final rule not be published.

BMW's Petition requests correction of EPA's Enforcement Compliance History Online database; EPA's Sector Facility Indexing Project database; and other EPA compliance databases. BMW claims that these databases erroneously show BMW as being in Significant Non-Compliance (SNC) with RCRA. BMW claims that these SNC listings for it are based only on alleged violation of an EPA guidance memorandum which is now being judicially reviewed by the D.C. Circuit.

Proposed NHTSA
Tire Safety Tests Produce Random Results
The tire safety tests and other information in NHTSAs FMVSS
No 139 rulemaking do not comply with the standards set by the Department
of Transportations Data Quality guidelines. Of particular
concern, two key tests, the endurance test and the high speed test,
are unreliable and produce essentially random results. NHTSA documents
in the docket state that "4 of 8 tire brand/model failures
were consistent with this [NHTSAs] theory [of how tires should
perform in the endurance test.]" The NHTSA test documents for
the high speed test demonstrate that only 3 of 8 tire brand/model
failures were consistent with the agencys theory of how tires
should perform in the test. NHTSAs theory was that the same
brand/model of tire would accumulate more failures when subjected
to tests the agency believed to be of increasing stringency. If
the tires performed according to theory, it would demonstrate that
the proposed tests could distinguish between stronger, i.e. potentially
safer tires, and tires which were not as strong. Since the relationship
between tire failure and the agencys perception of test stringency
was essentially random for both the endurance and high speed tests,
the tests do not provide useful information regarding tire safety
and, thus, lack utility as defined by the OMB and DOT Data Quality
guidelines. CREs analysis of the rulemakings compliance
with the Departments Data Quality guidelines clearly indicate
that substantial work will be needed for a final rule to meet the
Departments stringent pre-dissemination review requirements.

Click to read CRE’s letter to NHTSA and analysis of FMVSS No. 139 compliance
with the Data Quality Act

The Metcalf Insititute, A Leading Journalistic Institute for Accurate Scientific
and Environmental Reporting, Spotlights the CRE Atrazine Petition
The far-ranging implications of CREs atrazine petition were
highlighted in an article by the Metcalf Institute discussing the
Data Quality Act. The article notes that "the CRE challenge
has a broader sweep: It asserts that the government may neither
publish nor use scientific studies until government validation protocols
are finalized."

OMB Watch Comparison of Proposed and Final Agency Data Quality Guidelines
OMB Watch compares the draft and final data quality guidelines generated
by a variety of agencies and departments. OMB Watch concludes, however,
that since there has been a wide variety in the format, detail and release
among the various agencies drafting data quality guidelines, it is possible
that this comparison has missed some information. Nonetheless, the OMB
Watch analyses provide interesting insights.

CRE Data Quality
Petition on Atrazine Criticized
BNAs Daily Environment Reporter reported several criticisms
directed at the Atrazine Data Quality petition filed jointly by
CRE, the Kansas Corn Growers Association and the Triazine Network.
The World Wildlife Fund stated, "I think this is a colossally
cynical action that is designed to impose a gag order on EPA from
saying anything meaningful about endocrine disruption from chemicals."
OMB Watch stated, "It creates a vulnerability in the agency
that will allow the regulated industry to slow down and possibly
derail agency actions." It should be noted that CRE examined
a large number of other possible Data Quality actions prior to deciding
to file the Atrazine petition. A reading of the petition clearly
demonstrates that there are no validated tests for measuring endocrine
disruption and this deficiency is in complete violation of the Data
Quality Act.

CRE Invokes Data
Quality Act for NHTSA Information Collection Request
One of OMB's tools in enforcing agency compliance with the Data
Quality Act is through their statutory authority, under the Paperwork
Reduction Act, to decide whether to approve Information Collection
Requests. OMB has publicly committed to approve only those proposed
information collections that "are likely to obtain data that would
comply with OMB and agency" Data Quality guidelines. NHTSA recently
submitted an ICR for the TREAD Act-related Early Warning reporting system.
In comments to OMB, CRE demonstrated NHTSA has not yet complied ith DOT's
Data Quality guidelines in several critical respects including making
public a detailed plan for using the data that would be obtained under
the ICR. In that Early Warning ICR is one of the first major information
collections to be presented to OMB after October 1st, CRE will be reporting
on the Early Warning reporting system's compliance with the Data Quality Act.

The Center for Data Quality (C4DQ) Urges Greater Focus on Pre-Dissemination Review by Agencies
In comments on CRE's Interpretive Bulletin #1, C4DQ points
out the importance of that portion of the OMB guidance which emphasizes
the need for agency processes to address quality in the creation, collection,
and maintenance of information as well as dissemination. In other words,
quality in dissemination is only the tip of the iceberg. Agencies should
seek active partnerships with, and assistance from, the private sector
in tailoring pre-dissemination processes for individual programs so that
quality is maximized before there is any possible need for someone to
resort to the newly established administrative correction mechanisms.
Post-dissemination correction is likely to be an inefficient and poor
substitute for proactive quality controls.

OMB Outlines Its Role in Overseeing Implementation of the Data Quality Act
OMB has issued a memorandum outlining its role in the implementation of the Data Quality Act. The memorandum requires that copies of certain categories of complaints be forwarded to OMB prior to agency action. The OMB memorandum also emphasizes the importance of the agency annual reports to OMB on their respective implementation of the Act. OMB has removed most reporting requirements when agencies present such information on their website. As set forth in the Reg Week article of last week, CRE plans to issue periodically CRE Interpretive Bulletins for consideration by OMB and the agencies. The Bulletins consist of CRE interpretations of agency guidelines, which if adopted, will increase the effectiveness of the implementation of the Data Quality Act.

CRE Interpretive Bulletin No. 1
One of CRE's mandates is to promote efficiency in agency actions. Since
most agencies have finalized their Data Quality guidelines, CRE will be
providing recommendations for improving the efficiency of the federal
Data Quality program. CRE will communicate its recommendations through
Interpretive Bulletins. Prior to finalizing the Bulletins, CRE will post
them in draft on this site for public comment. CRE requests the views
of its readers with respect to topics that should be addressed through
the Bulletins. The first CRE Interpretive Bulletin concerns an issue raised
by a number of persons who, although supportive of the Act, are concerned
about the potential for correction petitions to over-burden agencies.
Basically, the issue could be described as the difference between a "Win-at-the-Agency"
approach and a "Win-in-Court" strategy. In the former, a petitioner asks
the agency to correct only those determinative issues that affect an outcome,
while the latter approach develops a comprehensive list of issues, with
varying degrees of significance, with the intent to develop a complete
record for eventual judicial review.

Assessing the Future
Impact of the Data Quality Act on Federal Agencies
A panel sponsored by the American Bar Association will convene at the
Ritz-Carlton on Thursday, October 17th, at 3:00p.m. The meeting, which
will mark the inception of Federal agencies' compliance with OMB guidelines
specified under the Data Quality Act, will include:

Panelists will review and
assess the requirements of the guidelines, and assess the potential impact
of the requirements on agencies in the immediate and long-term future.

CRE Comments on
EPA's Proposed Data Quality Guidelines for Third-Party Submissions
EPA's Draft Assessment Factors for Evaluating the Quality of Information
from External Sources explains how EPA will apply Data Quality Act
standards to information submitted to EPA by parties outside the Agency.
CRE's comments on this very important document identified several shortcomings.
One of CRE's major concerns is EPA's proposed use of a long list of EPA
documents to determine whether third-party submissions comply with the
Data Quality Act. CRE's comments explain that many documents on this list
do not comply with the Data Quality Act. Consequently, they should not
be used as a yardstick for Data Quality Act compliance.

EPA Proposes New
Data Quality Act Guidelines for Third-Party Submissions and Announces
a September 20 Public Meeting on the Proposal
Much of the "information" disseminated by EPA is generated by third parties
outside of the Agency: e.g., public comment in rulemakings and
outside research. In the September 9th Federal Register notice,
EPA proposed Data Quality Act guidelines for third-party information submissions.
The notice provides EPA's proposed standards for determining whether third-party
submissions are of sufficient quality to be used by the Agency. It includes
appendices identifying the risk assessment methods, models, and guidance
documents EPA will use to determine whether third-party submissions comply
with the Data Quality Act Standards. Yet many of these methods, models
and guidance documents themselves may violate the Data Quality Act Standards.
EPA's website states that written comments must be postmarked by September
30.

OMB Affirms Requirement
for Timely Agency Responses to Data Quality Complaints During Rulemakings
In a September 5th memorandum from Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs (OIRA) Administrator John Graham, OMB thanked federal agencies
for the significant progress they have made in developing their draft
Data Quality guidelines. The OMB memo also provided additional guidance
on process issues so as to promote uniformity across agencies. Among the
guidance provided by OMB was specific recommended language to ensure that
agencies respond to Data Quality Act complaints during rulemakings in
a timely fashion.

Watchdog Watch:
NRDC Expresses Views on CRE's Regulatory Watchdog Role
CRE is launching a new feature entitled "Watchdog Watch" to review the
activities of organizations whose primary activity is to either participate
directly in a wide range of regulatory proceedings or, through their website,
to significantly influence the participation of other persons in such
rulemakings. To this end, the Center has reviewed comments submitted by
the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) to EPA on the agency's proposed
Data Quality Act guidelines, spelling out in some detail the document's
strengths and areas of potential improvement. However, of comparable concern
to NRDC was CRE's emerging preeminence as a "Regulatory Watchdog," which
not only tracks the regulatory activities of federal agencies, but also
monitors the regulatory activities of special interest groups. In future
Watchdog Watch articles, CRE will present an analysis of statements and
positions taken by such groups.

Additional Agencies
Issue Proposed Data Quality Guidelines
In recognition of the importance of the Data Quality Act, CRE is pleased
to report that additional agencies have now issued proposed Data Quality
guidelines for public comment (click on "Data Quality Guidelines by Agency"
box to access guidelines). While in some cases, these proposals may be
late, the agencies have nevertheless worked to comply with the statute.
CRE also applauds various Bureaus within the Department of the Interior
for preparing their own Data Quality guidelines, which further refine
earlier, Department-wide guidelines. The Center believes that further
detail and specificity in guidelines at the sub-agency level will not
only increase transparency but result in smoother functioning of the standards
and procedures put in place pursuant to the Act. Comment deadlines for
these new guidelines are set forth below.

Failure to Withdraw
Flawed Proposals and Drafts Raises Cross-cutting Data Quality Issue
In its recent memorandum to all federal agencies on Data Quality issues,
OMB indicated concern with situations where agencies continue to disseminate
information for an unusually long time which does not meet the new Data
Quality Act standards. OMB recognized that even though such information
may be labeled as "draft" or"proposed," if it remains
outstanding for an extended period, it can have deleterious effects which
should be remedied. However, apparently, none of the agencies have addressed
this issue in their draft Data Quality guidelines. Agency guidelines should
state that once it becomes apparent that a proposal or draft is flawed,
or final action is deferred due to recognized problems with the proposal
or draft, it will be unequivocally withdrawn rather than being consigned
to indefinite status as a deferred proposal, draft, or interim position.
If the problems are later resolved, the agency can then issue a new proposal
or draft.

National Academies
Publish Transcript of Data Quality Workshop
The National Academies' Science, Technology, and Law Program has now made
the transcript available from its Data Quality Workshop held May 30, 2002.
This was the third and final session on this topic, and the purpose of
this open, public meeting was to discuss newly-issued draft agency-specific
guidelines, issued to conform with OMB's government-wide Data Quality
guidelines. The NAS meeting was attended by over 200 participants, and
CRE believes that the exchange of ideas at the meeting was useful to federal
agencies as they seek to finalize their Data Quality guidelines.

Click to review the transcript and related materials from the May
30, 2002 NAS Data Quality Workshop

Click to review the transcript and related materials from the March
21-22, 2002 NAS Data Quality Workshop

CRE Reader Reports
on Serious Data Quality Problems with Department of Education Information
Related to Special Education
A retired member of the Professional Advisory Board to a chapter of the
Tourette Syndrome Association recently wrote to CRE to make the Center
and its readers aware of serious deficiencies in the quality of information
issued by the U.S. Department of Education (USDOE) related to special
education data, which this official labels as "blatantly inaccurate."
Much of this bad information continues to be used by the Department in
making regulatory and policy decision, despite the fact that these
information problems were cited in studies issued by the Department's
own Inspector General. If such reports are indeed true, this is just
the type of situation that Congress intended the Data Quality Act to remedy.

Click to review the Guest Column and to examine examples of problematic
studies issued by the Department of Education

ABA Section on Administrative
Law Issues Policy Letters to Agencies on Data Quality Guidelines
The American Bar Association's (ABA) Section on Administrative Law & Regulatory
Practice has issued Policy Letters to eight key federal agencies on their
Data Quality guidelines. While not representing the ABA as a whole, the
Section's comment letters provided insightful recommendations on the process
and procedural aspects of the proposed guidelines related to correction
of information. For example, in its letter to EPA, the Section challenges
the agency on several points, including: EPA's attempt to prohibit corrections
during the pendency of an open rulemaking proceeding; the agency's suggestion
(contrary to the statute) that it may elect to not correct certain information
due to "Agency priorities, time constraints or resources"; or limits on
subjecting models to the correction process. In light of the ABA Section's
considerable expertise in matters of administrative law, CRE urges agency
officials to carefully review and adopt the recommendations set forth
in these important Policy Letters.

Click to read more, including access to the ABA Section's Policy Letter
to key federal agencies on their proposed Data Quality guidelines

Washington Legal
Foundation (WLF) Article Seeks Increased Judicial Review of Agency Science
Alan Raul and Julie Zampa, of Sidley Austin Brown & Wood LLP, recently
authored a WLF Legal Backgrounder entitled "Deeper Judicial Scrutiny Needed
for Agencies' Use of Science." This thought-provoking article analyzed
new ground broken by the Tozzi v. DHHS case in terms of expanding judicial
review of federal agencies' use of science. Data Quality Act guidelines
are also discussed as a positive step to improve transparency of agency
decisionmaking and the quality of agency science. However, the article
notes that courts have adopted very inconsistent approaches in conducting
reviews of agency science, with some serious and probative, but others
overly deferential. The authors conclude that the Tozzi case took a valuable
step by increasing availability of judicial review, one which courts must
build upon by exercising these enhanced powers so as to review agency
science in a more consistent, predictable, and probative manner.

FCC Issues Study
on Horizontal Concentration in the Cable Industry with Data Quality Implications
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) recently released a study
examining the extent to which different levels of horizontal concentration
among multichannel video program distributors might affect the flow of
video programming to consumers. This study, utilizing experimental economics,
was designed to supplement an ongoing FCC rulemaking proceeding, examining,
among other things, the subscriber (horizontal ownership) limits that
apply to cable operators. CRE believes that this study, based upon experimental
economics, could have a significant impact on FCC regulatory activities,
and consequently, it is subject to the Data Quality Act guidelines. CRE
is considering conducting a review of this document to determine whether
it complies with the Data Quality guidelines.

DOE Proposed Data
Quality Guidelines Break New Ground on Two Important Issues
The Department of Energy's (DOE) proposed Data Quality guidelines were
issued late, but in at least two respects, they were worth the wait. First,
DOE proposes to apply Data Quality Act standards to its Information Collection
Requests (ICRs) submitted to OMB for approval under the Paperwork Reduction
Act (PRA). In DOE's own words, "... for all proposed collections of information
that will be disseminated to the public, DOE Elements should demonstrate
in their PRA clearance submissions to OMB that the proposed collection
of information will result in information that will be collected, maintained,
and used in a way consistent with the OMB and DOE information quality
guidelines." Second, DOE proposes a detailed application of the Safe Drinking
Water Act (SDWA) risk assessment standards to ecological as well as human
health risk assessments. CRE commends DOE, and urges the public to file
comments supporting DOE's proposals on these two issues. Comments are
due to the agency by August 22, 2002.

CRE Applauds Decision
of EPA's SAB to Form Data Quality Act Committee
CRE understands that the Executive Committee of EPA's Science Advisory
Board (SAB) has decided to create a new committee on EPA's development
of Data Quality Act guidelines. Important issues to be addressed by the
SAB Committee include reproducibility and third-party information submissions.
CRE believes that this approach will provide EPA with a source of strong
and independent scientific expertise as it tackles ongoing information
quality issues covered by the Data Quality Act guidelines. The Center
urges other federal agencies to consider, as appropriate, establishing
independent Data Quality Committees to advise the agencies regarding their
Data Quality Act guidelines and issues raised thereunder.

CRE Proposes
Alternative to Additional Regulation of the Securities Market
Over-regulation of Corporate America will reduce innovation and suppress
economic growth. As is usual when there is a failure in the markets,
the government's first instinct is to respond with additional regulatory
proposals, without first studying ways to strengthen the existing regulatory
system. It is this habitual discarding of existing systems and the creation
of new ones that contributes to an increase in the federal regulatory
reach. A case in point is the current failures in the securities markets.
Congress is considering passage of laws to expand regulation of corporations
and to create a vast new regulatory bureaucracy to check financial reports.
However, before such steps are taken, CRE recommends consideration of
the alternative of applying Data Quality Act guidelines to the corporate
data submitted to the SEC. CRE has under consideration a proposal to
develop Data Quality standards specific to financial reports; CRE welcomes
your views on developing this proposal. In particular, applying the
Data Quality Act to corporate filings at the SEC is an alternative to
creation of the Accounting Oversight Board contained in the Senate bill.

Lawmakers Provide
Comments on EPA's Proposed Data Quality Guidelines
Congressmen W.J. "Billy" Tauzin and Paul Gillmor recently issued a comment
letter to EPA regarding the agency's proposed Data Quality guidelines,
with special focus was on statements related to risk assessments. According
to the letter, "EPA's proposal would be inconsistent with law and it leaves
completely open-ended loopholes for EPA not to follow the SDWA principles
or any principles of objectivity." The comments also take EPA to task
for failing to state a reasonable rationale for treating human health
risk assessments differently from other forms of risk assessment (e.g.
drinking water, environmental health and safety). CRE urges EPA to carefully
consider the viewpoints of Members of Congress who helped pass the Data
Quality Act.

OMB Firm on Obligation
of Agencies to Comply with its Data Quality Guidelines
OMB's Administrator of OIRA issued a memorandum for all federal agencies
pointing out a number of areas in which agency draft guidelines did
not appear to be consistent with the OMB guidelines. The memorandum
emphasized that agencies need to "commit" to standards which are either
the same as those in the OMB guidelines or are consistent with them
(§ III). It also requested that agencies not insert statements in their
guidelines suggesting that they were free to ignore the OMB guidelines
(§ V). CRE also notes, however, that the OIRA memorandum did not cite
or quote the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 which
provided the original legal basis for OMB's authority and the agencies'
responsibility to comply with the OMB guidelines. The relevant statutory
text is therefore provided below.

University of Colorado
Newsletter Offers Exchange of Views on Data Quality Act
The University of Colorado's Center for Science and Technology Policy
Research recently published articles in its Ogmius Newsletter offering
an exchange of views on the Data Quality Act and its impact on the role
of science in policymaking. One article was authored by CRE Advisory Board
Member, Jim Tozzi, and an editorial response was provided by Chuck Herrick
of Stratus Consulting. The Center supports such efforts to explore such
key policy issues so that the Data Quality Act's implementation is both
effective and workable.

CRE Files Notice
of Intent to Sue DOE for Violation of the Data Quality Act
CRE filed notice of its intent to sue the Department of Energy (DOE)
for violation of its nondiscretionary duty to publish proposed Data
Quality Act guidelines for public notice and comment. DOE is the only
Cabinet-level agency that has failed to comply with its duties under
the Data Quality Act, despite a prior request by CRE for publication
of proposed guidelines. DOE's proposed guidelines must be sent to OMB
by August 1st, and they must be published in final form by October 1st.
Consequently, DOE's inexplicable violation of the statutory deadlines
for publishing proposed guidelines has already significantly diminished
the public's right to submit meaningful comment. Given CRE's historical
involvement in the Data Quality Act, this may be the first in a number
of judicial actions that CRE will file. For example, CRE may sue agencies
whose Data Quality guidelines do not comply with OMB's government-wide
guidelines.

DOE Energy Information
Administration Seeks Comments on Testing and Research Questionnaire to Improve
Data Quality
The Department of Energy's Energy Information Administration is seeking
public comments on its voluntary survey entitled "Generic Clearance for
Questionnaire Testing and Research" as part of its form clearance request
to OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act. The survey is used in a variety
of settings to determine how to best modify questionnaires in order to improve
the quality of the data generated, and CRE strongly supports DOE's efforts
in this regard. However, the Center believes that DOE should also factor
in the standards set forth in OMB's and the Department's Data Quality Act
guidelines. Both the survey and the guidelines serve the same goal, and
to the extent that survey information is disseminated, the guidelines already
apply.

MIT Professor
Offers Congressional Testimony Related to Global Warming
Dr. Richard Lindzen, a senior professor at MIT, recently offered Senate
testimony on the Global Warming report and summary issued by the U.N.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The testimony pointed
out a variety of scientific uncertainties in models designed to predict
climate change and of the tendency of the media and the public to focus
on worst-case scenarios. Dr. Lindzen called the IPCC document "flawed,"
and he questions the integrity and efficacy of the entire IPCC process,
which he claims was developed to build a case for carbon dioxide emissions
reductions under the Kyoto Treaty. CRE offers this testimony to its
readers as a fresh and informative perspective on the Global Warming
issue.

Click
to review the testimony of Dr. Richard S. Lindzen before the Senate Environment
and Public Works Committee

EPA Extends Comment
Period For Data Quality Guidelines
EPA informed CRE Friday afternoon June 14 that it had decided to extend
its public comment period on its proposed guidelines to June 21 due
to numerous requests received. The Agency still plans to meet the August
1 deadline for submitting its draft final guidelines to OMB for review.

OMB's Supplementary
Guidance on Data Quality: 1 Step Forward, 1 Leap Back
OMB recently issued supplementary guidance clarifying how federal agencies
should interpret OMB's earlier government-wide guidelines implementing
the Data Quality Act. OMB's latest guidance made several advances, in
that it addresses a number of inconsistencies among agencies. For example,
the new guidance eliminates agency attempts to apply the guidelines
on a case-by-case basis. However, OMB stepped backward by not sufficiently
clarifying that agencies cannot shield entire categories of information
from coverage under the Data Quality Act guidelines. Consequently, CRE
believes that when OMB reviews agencies' conforming Data Quality guidelines
beginning on August 1st, OMB should again specifically curtail agencies'
attempts, as they did in their originally proposed guidelines, to exempt
information through their broad definition of "archival data"and through
their use of loopholes to exempt a significant portion of the rulemaking
process from the Data Quality Act.

Click
to review OMB's press release and memorandum to the President's Management
Council regarding interpretation of the OMB Data Quality guidelines.

NSF Requests
PRA Comments on Data Quality Correction Form
The National Science Foundation is applying for a Paperwork Reduction
Act control number for the form to be used for seeking correction of information
maintained or disseminated by NSF. CRE expects similar requests for public
comment on the information correction forms proposed by other agencies.

Information Quality
Guidelines: CRE Issues Comments to All Federal Agencies on their Proposed
Data Quality Guidelines
In order to assist federal agencies in meeting their duties under the
Data Quality Act and OMB's guidelines, CRE has submitted comments to
all federal agencies that have issued proposed Data Quality guidelines.
For most agencies, the Center provided Generic Comments with cross-cutting
issues relevant to most or all agency guidelines, along with a Legal
Memorandum challenging agency attempts to exempt certain categories
of information from the guidelines coverage. For other specific agencies
(e.g. DOL, FTC, FDA, CDC, EPA), CRE also issued a set of agency-specific
comments. All of CRE's comments are available on the Data Quality guidelines
matrix, under "CRE Comments" for each agency. However, a sample
comment to the Department of Commerce is provided immediately below.

CRE Generic
Comments to All Federal Agencies on Data Quality Guidelines
CRE has provided written comments to all federal agencies that have
published proposed Data Quality guidelines. The sample letter provided
below was submitted to the Department of Commerce, but it is representative
of letters sent to most agencies. In addition to its letter comments,
the Center has attached two papers: (1) a set of CRE Generic Comments
which discuss a variety of important cross-cutting issues; and (2) a
Legal Memorandum challenging the OMB's and other agencies' attempts
to exempt certain categories of information from the Data Quality Act
guidelines' applicability.

CRE also submitted
detailed, agency-specific comments on the Data Quality guidelines of
select agencies (e.g. CDC/ATSDR, FDA, FTC, DOL, EPA) which can be accessed
by below. However, all CRE comments may be viewed by clicking on "CRE
Comments" under each agency under the Data Quality guidelines matrix.

Information Quality
Guidelines: CRE Issues Legal Opinion Stating that OMB Lacks Authority
to Create Exemptions from Data Quality Guidelines
When OMB issued its government-wide Data Quality guidelines, it created
a select number of exemptions from the guidelines' applicability. A
number of agencies went far beyond the OMB exemptions to such a degree
as to nearly eviscerate the Data Quality Act. CRE has issued a legal
opinion that concludes OMB and the other federal agencies lack authority
to create exemptions from the Data Quality guidelines. CRE's opinion
is based on the fact that the Data Quality guidelines are issued under
the Information Dissemination requirements of the Paperwork Reduction
Act. 44 U.S.C. §§ 3504(d)(1); 3516 note.

Data Quality Act:
CRE Submits Supplemental Comments to OSTP on its Data Quality Guidelines
The Office of Science and Technology Policy's (OSTP) proposed Data Quality
guidelines impose statutes of limitation for filing administrative correction
petitions. Petitions that are not filed within very short periods of time
after the information is disseminated could never be filed at all. These
deadlines for filing petitions are so short that they would in effect
deny the right to file a Data Quality petition to anyone who does not
follow OSTP on a daily basis. CRE does not believe that Congress intended
to restrict Data Quality petitions in this manner. CRE's comments urge
OSTP not to impose these statutes of limitation for filing petitions.
In addition, CRE's comments ask OSTP to address the issue of how the Data
Quality guidelines apply when interagency committees, comprised of several
federal agencies, disseminate information. OSTP is an appropriate agency
to address this issue because it is involved in several of these interagency
committees. CRE's comments propose an approach to this issue.

Click
to review CRE's comment letter to Office of Science and Technology Policy

Information Quality
Guidelines: EPA Ban on Third Party Clinical Human Test Data Violates
Data Quality Act
CRE has informed EPA that the agency's ban on third party clinical human
test data, pending National Academy of Sciences (NAS) review, violates
the Data Quality Act. In its letter to EPA, the Center points out that
these data are among the best available information regarding any substance's
risk to human health, and the Act requires the agency to consider and
use the best available data on health risks. Therefore, EPA's categorical
refusal to consider these data is a clear violation of the Act and OMB's
implementing Data Quality guidelines. CRE urges EPA to change its position
now. CRE is including this letter as part of its comments on EPA's proposed
Data Quality guidelines.

Information Quality
Guidelines: U.S. Chamber of Commerce Issues Checklist of Key Concerns
Regarding Agency Implementation of the Data Quality Act
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has sought to encourage trade associations,
businesses, and others to submit comments to agencies of interest on
their proposed Data Quality guidelines. To this end, the Chamber prepared
a checklist of key concerns which potential commenters might wish to
consider and then provide input. The Chamber's views are also offered
on each topic. CRE believes that this list is thoughtful and reasonably
comprehensive, so the Center wanted to make it available to its readers.

Click
to read the Chamber of Commerce checklist on the Agency Implementation
of the Data Quality Law.

Information Quality
Guidelines: CRE Submits Letter to NHTSA Recommending Points for Inclusion
in Agency's Proposed Data Quality Guidelines
CRE recently sent a letter to the Administrator of the National Highway
Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA) to recommend points for
inclusion in the agency's proposed Data Quality guidelines. The Center's
letter made suggestions regarding the standard of care for agency information
prior to issuance, applicability of the guidelines to third-party submissions,
procedures and deadlines for agency action on petitions, availability
of administrative appeals, standards for "influential" information,
and the applicability of the guidelines to enforcement actions. CRE
hopes its comments are useful to NHTSA in preparing its proposed guidelines.

Click
to view CRE's letter to NHTSA making recommendations on the agency's proposed
Data Quality guidelines

Click
to view CRE's letter to NHTSA urging diligent application of the Data
Quality guidelines to the agency's upcoming review of CAFÉ standards

Information Quality
Guidelines: CRE Applauds Agency Compliance with Data Quality Act as
Majority of Agencies Meet Deadline for Issuing Guidelines
CRE is pleased to report that the majority of federal agencies met the
May 1st deadline for issuance of proposed Data Quality guidelines, a
laudable accomplishment given the complexity of the Act. Although several
Cabinet agencies have yet to publish guidelines, the government's Data
Quality Program is off to a strong start. Most guidelines released to
date have done a good job to lay out the fundamentals, and subject to
future refinements, they can be expected to lead to improvements in
agency information. CRE is compiling a repository of all federal agency
Data Quality guidelines, accessible either through the blue box on the
CRE homepage or through the toolbar in the Data Quality issue section.
The Center will also be reporting on key guidelines and amendments thereto
in the coming weeks and urges readers to their submit comments to agencies
of interest with a copy to CRE.

DATA QUALITYData Quality: Social
Security Administration and USDA Agency Issue Proposed Data Quality
Guidelines
Two additional agencies, the Social Security Administration and the
Department of Agriculture's National Agricultural Statistics Service
(NASS) have posted proposed Data Quality guidelines on each agency's
website for public comment. CRE believes that the NASS guidelines serve
an excellent precedent by permitting individual agencies within a large
Department such as USDA to draft their own standards. This approach
has the potential to produce the most refined Data Quality standards
and should be considered by other Departments in lieu of a one-size
fits all approach. The Center has also learned that the Department of
Transportation's guidelines are nearly complete and will be published
in the Federal Register shortly.

Data Quality:
Partners of Washington, D.C. Law Firm Author Article on Impacts of Tozzi
v. DHHS Case: CRE Sees Major Implications for Data Quality Act
Partners at Bergeson & Campbell, P.C., a D.C. law firm specializing
in chemical, medical device, and diagnostic product approval and regulation,
recently authored an article entitled "The Tozzi Decision: Another
Arrow in Manufacturers' Quiver in Product Defense Wars." Although the
article emphasized the importance of the court's decision for designations
in the National Toxicology Program's Report on Carcinogens Program,
CRE believes that it will have even greater significance for judicial
review under the Data Quality Act. For example, the opinion provides
precedent for standing when information disseminated by a federal agency
is causing harm to a company or person to whom the information relates.

Click
to read the Bergeson & Campbell article on Tozzi v. DHHS from the
EPA Administrative Law Reporter

CRE to Emphasize
Data Quality Research
Although the Data Quality Act has to date be used primarily to address
regulatory issues, the Center believes that the issue of Data Quality
is significantly broader and that the Act will come to take on a more
fundamental role in federal government operations and for organizations
that interact with the government. Data Quality is a problem which must
be addressed by all organizations, and the public and private sectors
have been undertaking such efforts for a number of years. In support
of such efforts, the Center will be cataloging key materials related
to research on Data Quality.

Federal Data
Quality Act: CRE Files Data Quality Guideline Development Guide with
DOL
CRE has provided the Department of Labor with a Working Draft white
paper, Developing DOL's Data Quality Guidelines: A Step-by-Step Guide,
designed to assist DOL in developing their Data Quality guidelines.
A key issue discussed in the CRE guide is a discussion of the Department's
duty to establish a standard for information reproducibility. CRE recommended
that DOL's reproducibility standard include specific tests of robustness
for all information subject to the reproducibility requirement to ensure
that any and all test results are reliable.

Data Quality
Act: Guidelines Apply to Public Submissions to Agencies
In remarks to the National Economists Club, OIRA Administrator Dr. John
Graham said that Data Quality requirements apply to third-parties submitting
information to federal agencies. Since the guidelines apply to virtually
all information disseminated by agencies, Dr. Graham explained that
trade associations and other third parties which submit information
to the government intended for citation or other use, must ensure that
their information complies with Data Quality standards. Federal contractors
are also required to adhere to OMB's Data Quality requirements.

Advancing the Goals
of the Data Quality Act Cited in OMB Prompt Letter to EPA Requesting Improvements
to TRI Program
In a Prompt Letter to EPA, OIRA Administrator Dr. John Graham cited the
Data Quality Act as the primary justification for a number of recommendations
designed to enhance the practical utility of TRI data. The recommendations
include establishing a single facility identification number for each
reporting facility and speeding release of TRI data. EPA has 60 days to
respond to the Prompt Letter.

Implementation
of Data Quality Act Off to Timely Start: Federal Housing Finance Board,
OFHEO and Surface Transportation Board are First Agencies to Issue Proposed
Data Quality Guidelines
CRE compliments the Federal Housing Finance Board (FHFB), Office of
Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) and the Surface Transportation
Board (STB) for their early issuance of proposed Data Quality guidelines,
in compliance with the Data Quality Act. CRE will post these agencies'
guidelines in its Repository of "Data
Quality Guidelines by Agency". The Center is in the process of reviewing
the FHFB, OFHEO and STB guidelines and will submit public comments to
the agencies.

CRE Compiles Database
of Agency Data Quality Guidelines
CRE believes that agency promulgation of well-reasoned Data Quality guidelines
is critical to the successful implementation of the Data Quality Act.
Therefore, as a service to its readers and in order to facilitate public
input to agencies and they develop their guidelines, the Center, with
assistance from Federal Focus, Inc., is cataloging proposed and final
Data Quality guidelines and providing links to the relevant Federal Register
cites. CRE encourages all interested parties to submit copies of their
comments to agencies to CRE for posting on its website.

Click
to view matrix of federal agency actions on Data Quality guidelines development

Executive Branch
Officials Opine that Agency Denials of Data Quality Act Petitions are
Judicially Reviewable
During the March 21st NAS Data Quality Workshop, Executive Branch officials
expressed their opinion that denials of agency petitions under the Data
Quality Act will be judicially reviewable. While the views expressed
do not necessarily represent those of their Departments, they expressed
a viewpoint long held by CRE and other stakeholders. They went on to
note, however, that there may be a difference between what constitutes
an "affected person" who may bring a Data Quality petition and a litigant
who would have standing to bring a court challenge. It was also noted
that agencies will certainly rely upon the administrative record to
defend their actions in denying an appeal during the informal adjudication
phase so that a court does not later find these actions to be arbitrary
and capricious.

American Bar
Association to Host Meeting on Data Quality
On Friday, April 19th, the ABA Section on Administrative Law and Regulatory
Practice will hold a session on Data Quality. CRE believes that this
meeting is timely, given the upcoming May 1st deadline for agencies
to issue their proposed guidelines for Data Quality. CRE hopes that
this will be only the first in a series of meetings held by the ABA
on this important topic.

CRE Submits Comments
to EPA on the Agency's Data Quality Guidelines
EPA, in a precedent-setting move, has requested public comments prior
to proposing the agency's conforming Data Quality guidelines. CRE applauds
this step designed to promote early public involvement and input, and
urges other agencies to adopt this approach. CRE has taken this opportunity
to address a number of issues which should be considered by other federal
agencies in drafting Data Quality guidelines. CRE is making its comments
available immediately so as to be useful in the context of the Data
Quality Workshop being hosted by the National Academy of Sciences on
March 21-22. CRE encourages all interested parties to submit their input
on CRE's comments.

National Academy
of Sciences (NAS) to Hold Workshop on Data Quality
The NAS Program on Science, Technology and Law will be hosting the first
in a series of workshops on March 21-22 as part of its project entitled
"Ensuring the Quality of Information Disseminated by the Federal Government."
The goal is to assist federal agencies in successfully implementing
OMB's Data Quality guidelines, required under Pub. Law No. 106-554.
The meeting is open to the public, and an agenda and registration materials
are available on the NAS website. CRE encourages all interested parties
to attend the workshop and to provide their views to the agencies as
they implement this key Good Government law.

Read
more, including Key Information and to register for the Data Quality workshop

EPA Exercises Leadership
Role in Data Quality
EPA has long been a leader in Data Quality. The Agency has set up a major
operating unit which oversees the collection, dissemination, and quality
of its data. Recently, EPA has completed the construction of a major installation
in North Carolina dedicated to these information management functions.
In keeping with both the Agency's emphasis on Data Quality as well as
OMB's objective of public participation in the development of the guidelines,
EPA will be conducting an Online Public Comment Session from March 19-22.
EPA will provide instructions on how to provide public comment on their
website on March 19.

Syngenta's Response To Cedar's Position On Metolachlor
Syngenta has responded to CRE's posting of correspondence from Cedar
on the metolachlor controversy at EPA. Syngenta's response rebuts each
point made by Cedar. In particular, Syngenta explains that EPA's granting
Cedar's registration application for old metolachlor would cause the
unnecessary release into the environment of 17 to 22 million pounds
of pesticide each year. Syngenta also correctly points out that granting
Cedar's application would be the death knell for EPA's Reduced Risk
Initiative.

NRDC Warns EPA Not To Jeopardize Its
Reduced Risk Program For Pesticides
The Natural Resources Defense Council has informed EPA that failure to
cancel an old pesticide in lieu of a new more effective pesticide will
seriously undermine its reduced risk initiative program. The pesticide
in question is metolachlor. The manufacturer of the pesticide, Syngenta,
states that millions of pounds of the pesticide will no longer be used
if its old pesticide is canceled and its new pesticide S-metolachlor is
allowed to go on the market. A potential manufacturer of the old pesticide,
Cedar Chemical Corporation opposes the cancellation.

CRE Requests Withdrawal Of The National
Assessment On Climate Change On Federal Data Quality Act (FDQA) Grounds
CRE has requested that the United States Global Change Research Program
and the Office of Science and Technology withdraw the First National
Assessment on Global Climate Change because it violates the objectivity,
utility and reproducibility requirements of the Data Quality Act and
OMB's guidelines implementing the Act. More specifically, the National
Assessment violates the Act and OMB's guidelines.

CRE Seeks Public
Disclosure of EPA's Multi-Pollutant Air Emission Model
EPA is using an ICF Model to predict the economic effects of multi-pollutant
air emission legislation being considered by Congress and the Administration.
These modeling results could have a major impact on both the legislation
and the economy. Their accuracy and reproducibility are critically important.
Yet EPA has not allowed public review of and comment on the Model. Given
the importance of this issue, CRE has sent EPA's Chief Information Officer
a letter urging her to disclose the Model to the public. CRE has also
filed a Freedom of Information Act request for the Model and related
documents.

CRE Assesses
Agency Implementation of an Administrative Petition Process Under the
OMB Data Quality Guidelines
OMB recently published Data Quality guidelines for federal government
information, which provide additional detail regarding the administrative
petition process to be used to challenge agency information. CRE believes
that the burdens associated with this correction mechanism will be minimal
in light of the considerable experience which agencies already have
with petition processes. For example, at EPA alone, CRE has documented
399 existing references to petition processes in the agency's regulations.
Consequently, CRE believes that implementation of this key aspect of
the Data Quality guidelines will cause minimal disruption of ongoing
agency activities.

Click
to read more, including CRE's analysis of petition processes at EPA

OMB Issues Data
Quality Guidelines Which Provide the Foundation for a Unified Federal
Risk Assessment Program
For more than two decades, the federal government has been attempting
to establish guidelines for a consistent assessment of comparable risks
across various agencies. OMB's recently promulgated Data Quality guidelines
will go a long way in reducing such interagency differences. Inconsistencies
will be narrowed, in part, because of the modifications made by OMB
to its previously published interim Data Quality guidelines, based upon
public comment. The Data Quality guidelines, coupled with OMB's regulatory
review authorities set forth in Executive Order 12866, require that
OMB review the risk assessments that underlie federal regulations to
ensure both consistency across agencies and compliance with the guidelines.

Federal Court
Requires That Agency Risk Assessments Be Reproducible And Transparent
In an important recent opinion, the United States District Court for
the Eastern District of California suspended rules issued by the Department
of Agriculture in part because the risk assessment underlying the rules
was not reproducible and transparent. Harlan Land Company v. Dept.
of Agriculture, CV-00-6106 (Sept. 21, 2001).

D.C. Court Of
Appeals Rules In Tozzi v. DHHS That When An Agency Issues A Pejorative
Statement, The Statement Is Judicially Reviewable: Major Implications
For The Federal Data Quality Act (FDQA)
This case holds that a corporation can sue when an agency makes a pejorative
statement against a corporation, product, or person, before such a statement
is incorporated in a final rule. This opinion will have a major impact
on the Data Quality Law because an agency denial of a petition for correction
will be reinforced by the standing and reviewability criteria in this
opinion. Notwithstanding the courts deference to an agency's interpretation
of its own rules, the opinion sets a major precedent on both a government-wide
basis and for EPA's upcoming dioxin reassessment in particular.

CRE Submits Comments
on "Reproducibility" Standard in OMB's Data Quality Guidelines
CRE submitted comments to OMB on the "capable of being substantially
reproduced" standard included in the agency's final Data Quality guidelines.
The reproducibility standard was issued on an interim final basis, and
OMB accepted additional public comments on that key aspect of the guidelines
through October 29, 2001. CRE strongly supports OMB's reproducibility
requirement as a standard of care for governmental information. If information
is not sufficiently robust that it cannot be reproduced by independent
parties across testing environments, it should not be deemed adequately
reliable for dissemination to the public. CRE urges OMB to retain this
important aspect of the guidelines.

EPA Expresses
Support for OMB Data Quality Guidelines
EPA, already one of the leading agencies in terms of its process to
ensure information quality, recently expressed its strong support for
OMB's proposed Data Quality guidelines, that set government-wide standards
for the quality of information disseminated to the public. In its comments
to OMB, EPA's Office of the Inspector General stated that it "has reviewed
the proposed guidelines and concurs. In our opinion, the guidelines
will assist in maximizing data quality without being overly prescriptive
or burdensome." EPA has demonstrated its commitment by its long history
of working on information quality issues, and interested parties look
forward to the agency's development of its conforming guidelines for
Data Quality. CRE believes that EPA may be a model for other federal
agencies as they seek to implement the provisions of the Data Quality
law.

Nobel Prize Winners
In Economics Demonstrate The Need For Data Quality Legislation
The Washington Post reports that the award was based upon the economists
conclusion " that government must play a strong role in a market system,
to prevent damage from imperfect information". Clearly the Nobel prize
committee recognized the regulatory paradigm of the new millennium,
i.e. regulation by information. CRE is the institution that first coined
the term "regulation by information" and so tailored it's proposal for
the need for federal data quality legislation.

Risk Policy Report
Publishes Article on the Federal Information Triangle
Risk Policy Report, a preeminent publication in the field of risk analysis,
has published an article on the Federal Information Triangle tracing
its origins to the creation of OMB's Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs and its attendant regulatory statutes, the Paperwork Reduction
Act and the Data Quality Act. The Risk Policy Report is a publication
of Inside Washington Publishers. (www.insideepa.com)

CRE Catalogs All
Comments Submitted to OMB on its Proposed Data Quality Guidelines
CRE is a repository for information on the Data Quality law. Consequently,
as a service to its readers, CRE has posted all of the nearly 100 public
comments which OMB received related to the publication of its proposed
Data Quality guidelines. The purpose of this section is to provide a
forum for the important public policy discussion on this issue.

Read
more and review public comments submitted to OMB on the Data Quality Guidelines.

OMB Promulgates
Final Agency Guidelines on Data Quality
OMB has met its statutory deadline to promulgate data quality guidelines.
The issuance of these landmark guidelines completes a thirty year effort
to construct the Federal Information Triangle: the establishment of
a central regulatory review office in OMB (OIRA), the passage of the
Paperwork Reduction Act which controls data coming into the government,
and the Data Quality Act which controls data disseminated by the Federal
government.

CRE Responds to
Federal Times Article on Data Quality
Federal Times, a preeminent publication for federal employees, reported
that a number of its readers were concerned about the reproducibility
provisions of the OMB's Data Quality guidelines as well as the impact
these guidelines would have on peer review. CRE not only addressed these
concerns in an Op-Ed piece to the Federal Times but had also given explicit
considerations to those issues in its proposals for enactment of federal
data quality legislation.

OMB to Complete
Work on Data Quality Guidance.
The public comment period on OMB's proposed Data Quality guidance closed
on August 13, 2001. OMB has received in the neighborhood of 100 public comments.
The very substantial number of public comments received signals the importance
that the regulated community and the public accord to the forthcoming guidance.
The Data Quality statute requires that OMB promulgate its final guidance
no later than September 30, 2001. CRE will be issuing periodic reports on
the comments submitted to OMB. CRE's comments emphasize the important role
that the Chief Information Officer, or designated Ombudsman plays in this
new program.

OMB Issues Landmark
Guidelines on Data Quality for Federal Agencies
Pursuant to statutory requirements enacted last year, OMB has issued
proposed guidelines that set quality thresholds for information disseminated
by the federal government. This congressional mandate for Data Quality
was in response to federal agencies' growing use of the Internet and
other communications mechanisms that permit dissemination of information
that either expands existing regulations, is a precursor to new federal
regulations, acts as an incentive for state and/or local authorities
to regulate, or affects consumer perceptions. The 45-day public comment
period on the proposed guidelines ends August 13, 2001. CRE commends
OMB for the timely issuance of this important guidance.

CRE Petitions
CIO on NIOSH Biosolids Hazard ID Document
After receiving an unsatisfactory response to an earlier CRE letter raising
data quality issues regarding HID 10 from NIOSH, CRE submitted a petition
directly to the CDC and HHS Chief Information Officers alleging specific
failures to comply with OMB Circular A-130 and invoking the "ombudsman"
responsibilities of the CIOs under the Circular. CRE believes that this
will be a useful test case for identifying specific requirements that should
be included in the new rules being developed by OMB and individual agencies
under the new data quality legislation.

CRE Data Quality
Petition to EPA on Global Climate Change
CRE is concerned that EPA disseminates public documents (such as Federal
Register notices and Internet Website pages) that lead readers to believe
that we know as scientific fact that: (1) global climate change is occurring
because of anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases; and (2) the
effects will include numerous specific adverse effects on human health
and the environment. CRE petitioned EPA to correct a recent Federal
Register notice, by publishing a notice alerting readers about the considerable
scientific uncertainties surrounding the issue of global climate change.
CRE also petitioned EPA to assure that all future EPA public documents
that describe potential global climate change include a statement about
scientific uncertainties.

OMB Announces
Schedule for Issuance of Data Quality Guidelines
As part of the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory
Actions published in the May 14, 2000 Federal Register, OMB
has provided a schedule for issuance of Data Quality guidelines, as
required by H.R. 4577, the Treasury/General Government Appropriations
Act of 2001 (contained in P.L. 106-554).

OMB has announced that its proposed Data Quality guidance will be issued
in the month of May, and its final guidance will be issued in September.
CRE applauds OMB for meeting the timelines set forth in this important
new Good Government statute. With issuance of this guidance, OMB will
have put in place safeguards both on information collected by the federal
government (governed under OMB Circular A-130) as well as information
disseminated by the federal government (governed under the new Data
Quality guidelines). These two instruments, along with the statutory
authority granted to OMB's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs
(OIRA), constitutes a very important "Federal Information Triangle"
for the orderly and efficient operation of the federal government.

Read
OMB's listing for the Data Quality guidance contained in the Unified Agenda.

NIOSH Responds
to CRE Data Quality Letter
Acting CDC Director Dr. Larry Fine has responded, in a May 3 letter,
to CRE's March 9 letter on data quality issues raised by a recent NIOSH
Hazard ID on land application of biosolids. The CDC letter contends
that NIOSH complied fully with OMB's Circular A-130 in issuing HID and
offers to meet to discuss the matter. CRE is preparing a response.

OMB Watch Offers
Views On CRE's Interpretation Of Data Quality Act
In its April 30th Vol. 2 No. 9 issue, OMB Watch comments on a letter
that CRE had written to the Editor. The CRE letter, and the OMB Watch
response, can be accessed below. It appears that OMB Watch has several
interpretations of the data quality statute which differ from those
of CRE. First, CRE believes that OMB must define the terms set forth
in the statute including quality, objectivity, integrity and utility;
CRE also feels that each agency must write regulations which conform
with those issued by OMB. CRE is interested in obtaining its readers'
views on these matters.

The New York
Times Reports the Federal Data Quality Act (FDQA) Might Delay the
EPA Particulate RuleThe New York Times reports that data quality legislation could
delay issuance of the Particulate Rule. In a front page article on April
21st, 2001, the New York Times stated that the EPA has new conclusive
evidence which supports the issuance of the rule on fine particulates.
The article goes on to say, however, that they expect the issuance of
the rule to be delayed because of the recently enacted data quality
statute which will allow the Office of Management and Budget to review
the underlying studies.
"Tiny
Bits of Soot Tied To Illnesses," The
New York Times, April 21, 2001

The Majority Of
EPA's Science Advisory Board Concludes That Dioxin Is Not A Known Human
Carcinogen
In a nine to seven vote the majority of the voting members of the EPA's
Science Advisory Board voted in a public teleconference call on April
23rd not to designate dioxin as a known human carcinogen.
In lieu of informing the public that a "majority" of the SAB voted not
to designate dioxin as a known human carcinogen, the SAB intends to
state that "about half" do not support the proposed designation. CRE
objects to this mischaracterization by the Board. In the attached letter
CRE has called this matter to the attention of the Executive Committee
of the SAB. CRE invites its readers to inform the Executive Committee
of this mischaracterization.

CRE
Uses NIOSH Hazard ID on Biosolids as Case Example of Issues That Should
Be Addressed in New OMB and Agency Data Quality Rules, as Well as Under
Existing OMB Guidance
In July, NIOSH issued a Hazard alert (HID 10) concerning bacteria detected
at a biosolids land application facility, and potential gastrointestinal
sickness that might be associated with the presence of pathogens. NIOSH
also recommended measures to mitigate the potential exposures. Controversy
ensued concerning whether there was a sound basis for the alert and its
recommendations, and the controversy has not yet been resolved. CRE has
written to OMB and NIOSH, including its Chief Information Officer, to point
out (a) the types of issues raised by the controversy that should be addressed
in the data quality rules which OMB and agencies are now required to issue;
and (b) existing OMB guidance on data quality which should be utilized in
the interim to resolve this and similar data quality controversies.

EPA
Responds Positively to CRE Suggestions on Greenhouse Gases
EPA recently sent a letter to CRE responding to CRE's request that:
(i) the agency deny the International Center for Technology Assessment
(CTA) petition to regulate greenhouse gases, and (ii) make several changes
to the agency's Global Warming Website. In the letter, EPA agreed to
publish the CTA petition in the Federal Register for public comment
prior to making a determination on the need for regulation, and the
agency plans to implement some of CRE's recommended changes to the website.
CRE looks forward to further cooperative engagement with EPA in order
to advance Data Quality.

CRE
Receives Comment Offering Different Perspective on Data QualityCRE and
others interested in Data Quality have primarily focused on the need for
accurate information to serve as the basis for federal regulation. However,
in a comment submitted by Cargill Fertilizer, Inc., it was pointed out that
data can sometimes be generated solely for the purpose of determining whether
a regulatory limit has been reached. In such cases, achieving greater accuracy
would be an unnecessary and costly exercise. While CRE agrees that pinpoint
accuracy of scientific values in every situation may be unwarranted, Data
Quality in the context of current congressional legislation focuses on federal
agencies' information use and dissemination. The onus to correct inaccuracies
would be on the agencies and would only be triggered where an interested
party brings a petition, thereby presumably limiting instances of Data Quality
challenge for mere academic benefit. However, CRE values this important
perspective which should surely be kept in mind.

CRE
Announces Initiative for Applying Data Quality Law to the Financial
Sector
CRE considers the new Data Quality statute to be a "Good Government"
law of wide scope and is emphasizing initial application to the federal
Financial Sector. As a prototype case, CRE is focusing its Data Quality
Initiative on the risk assessment being conducted by the Office of Federal
Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) of the systemic risk posed by Fannie
Mae and Freddie Mac. CRE anticipates broadening the Data Quality Initiative
to other agencies in the near future.

Click
here to read more about the CRE Data Quality Initiative for the Financial
Sector, its application to the OFHEO systemic risk assessment, and CRE's
comments to OFHEO.

OMB to Begin Implementing
New Data Quality Law
Important new Data Quality legislation was recently passed as part of
the FY 2001 Consolidated Appropriations Act (Public Law 106-554 section
515). The law requires OMB by September 30, 2001, to develop government-wide
standards for information quality as guidelines, including a correction
mechanism. Other federal agencies must issue conforming guidelines based
upon the OMB standard. CRE strongly supports the Data Quality law as an
advancement of Good Government principles.

President
Signs Data Quality Legislation (Federal Data Quality Act (FDQA)) (Public
Law 106-554 Section 515)The Congress has passed and the President has
signed important new Data Quality legislation as part of the FY 2001 Consolidated
Appropriations Act (Public Law 106-554). Building upon the Data Quality
report language contained in the FY 1999 Omnibus Appropriations Act (P.L.
105-277), this new provision requires OMB to develop government-wide standards
for the quality of information used and disseminated by the federal government,
with such standards to be completed not later than September 30, 2001. OMB
must also include a mechanism through which the interested public can petition
agencies to correct information which does not meet the OMB standard. Congress
has provided for broad input in developing the Data Quality standard, mandating
that OMB shall seek "public and Federal agency involvement."

Click
to read more, including the Statutory Language for Data Quality and Past
Report Language

On May 2, 2000, CRE sent a letter to EPA petitioning
the agency to initiate a Data Quality program for the correction of inaccurate
data, particularly on the agency's website. The catalyst for the letter
was another petition by the International Center for Technology Assessment
(ICTA) for a rulemaking to limit emissions of "greenhouse gases" from motor
vehicles pursuant to § 202 of the Clean Air Act. The ICTA request relied
heavily on information posted on EPA's Global Warming Website, a source
which CRE has already analyzed and determined to contain serious Data Quality
problems.

The
CRE Petition to EPA The CRE petition asks EPA to undertake a rulemaking to establish
procedures and criteria for correcting erroneous data, including that
placed on the Global Warming Website. CRE also asked that the ICTA petition
be held in abeyance until such time as these Data Quality procedures are
vetted through public comment, finalized, and implemented by the agency.
CRE's request was made pursuant to OMB Circular A-130 (Management of Federal
Information Resources) and the Data Quality directives to EPA in report
language adopted as part of the FY 2000 VA-HUD-Independent Agencies Appropriations
Act (P.L. 106-74). These sources specifically provide:

OMB Circular A-130

9. Assignment of Responsibilities:

a. All Federal Agencies.
The head of each agency shall:

. . . .

10. Direct the senior official appointed pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 3506(a)
to monitor agency compliance with the policies, procedures, and guidance
in this Circular. Acting as an ombudsman, the senior official shall consider
alleged instances of agency failure to comply with this Circular and recommend
or take corrective action as appropriate. The senior official shall report
annually, not later than February 1st of each year, to the Director those
instances of alleged failure to comply with this Circular and their resolution.

Senate Report No. 106-161 "Second, EPA shall establish procedures to engage the public in the
development, maintenance and modification of information products it offers
to the public. These procedures should allow the public a timely opportunity
to comment on all aspects of a new information product, including issues
concerning data quality, analytical methodology, public presentation of
data and the use of data for a purpose that differs from the original purpose
for which it was collected. At a minimum, these procedures shall include
the process EPA and the states will use to assure prompt correction of data
errors in existing EPA Internet resources. These procedures shall also be
consistent with EPA's obligations under the Paperwork Reduction Act."

(Senate Report 106-161 at
p. 81.)
EPA's Response to CRE EPA responded to CRE in a July 26th letter, stating its position
that a Data Quality rulemaking is not necessary because the Office of
Environmental Information (OEI) is currently developing and implementing
procedures to improve information quality consistent with the language
contained in the Senate report. EPA points to the ongoing work of an EPA-State
Action Team (done in cooperation with the Environmental Council of the
States) which is designed to involve interested parties in the development
of significant EPA and state information products. EPA also notes the
initiation of an on-line error correction procedure for most existing
EPA databases. (For a fuller description of the Data Quality corrective
mechanisms espoused by EPA, click on the icon for the EPA correspondence
below.)

CRE's View of EPA's Data
Quality Measures CRE has examined the EPA measures and believes that they meet OMB's
and the agency's own requirements to ensure Data Quality. CRE encourages
interested parties to review and utilize these measures put forth by EPA
and to share your views/experiences with CRE.

CRE
Receives Comments on its Draft Data Quality RuleUnder the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 and more recently
as part of the FY 1999 Omnibus Appropriations Act (P.L. 105-277), Congress
has asked OMB to issue government-wide standard for Data Quality which
would:

Set
up an administrative mechanism whereby the interested public could seek
agency correction of information which does not meet the OMB standard.

Data Quality
is a matter of extreme importance, especially in the Information Age,
where government data can be posted on agency websites for worldwide distribution
in a matter of minutes. Add to this the fact that government information
often serves as the basis for federal regulations and other policies which
can have a significant impact on businesses and the public, and the need
for strong and consistent Data Quality standards for federal information
becomes apparent.

CRE developed
its own draft Data Quality rule to provide
a strawman for discussion as OMB seeks to craft its own Data Quality rule.
We believe that the CRE draft rule demonstrates that it is possible to
create a reasonable rule which will meet the Data Quality expectations
of Congress without causing undue burden to the agencies. OMB can accomplish
this by setting a reasonable standard for standing to bring a Data Quality
petition. Also, an analysis of existing procedures at EPA showed that
143 different petition mechanisms already are in use at that agency alone,
so a corrective mechanism for Data Quality is unlikely to be either novel
or to cause an excessive additional burden to an agency.

CRE appreciates
the comments it has received on its draft Data Quality rule and urges
others to provide their views. Public comments received can be accessed
through the links provided below.

Congress
Directs EPA to Assess Opportunities for Judicial Review of Agency Information
Congress has recently directed EPA to undertake a number of information-related
activities, as spelled out in report language accompanying the FY 2000
VA-HUD-Independent Agencies Appropriation Act (P.L. 106-74). Among these
is a cooperative agreement to determine when judicial review should be
allowed for government disseminations of information, in electronic or
other formats. CRE believes that structured mechanisms for review of agency
information increase the overall quality of data, thereby fostering public
confidence in both EPA information and regulatory policy. CRE encourages
EPA to act promptly to fulfill this important congressional mandate.

OSHA
Data Initiative Offers Opportunity to Enhance Data Quality
OSHA recently announced in the Federal Register (65 Fed. Reg. 39944, June
28, 2000) an opportunity for the public to comment on its Data Initiative,
which is designed to collect employer-specific data on injuries and illnesses
in the workplace. Previously, OSHA data collection efforts had been industry-wide,
and this aggregation of information tended to mask the experiences of
individual employers.

CRE Legislative
Working Papers on Data Access and Data Quality
CRE has been one of the initial proponents of federal legislation for
Data Access and Data Quality, due to the important role that government
information plays in regulation and resource allocation. Consequently,
CRE developed an extensive set of legislative working papers in support
of these key data provisions subsequently enacted by Congress. CRE's papers
discuss the need for the legislation, key issues to be addressed, and
an explanation of how responsibilities for Data Access and Data Quality
have a basis under preexisting statutory authority.

OMB
Requests Comments on Circular A-130: A Potential Mechanism for Correction
of Federal Government Information
OMB recently published a public comment request in the Federal Register
related to revisions to OMB Circular A-130 (Management of Federal Information
Resources) to implement provisions of the Information Technology Management
Reform Act of 1996 (
65 Fed. Reg. 19933, April 13, 2000). As has been noted by OMB,
Circular A-130 may also provide a mechanism for the public to seek correction
of information used and disseminated by the federal government which is
lacking in quality. CRE has submitted a comment to OMB seeking development
of specific procedures under A-130 for the correction of inaccurate or
misleading data. CRE urges interested persons to make their thoughts on
this important issue known to OMB.

EXECUTIVE
OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20502

ADMINISTRATOR
OFFICE OF INFORMATION AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

April 18, 2000

The Honorable Jo
Ann Emerson
US House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515

Dear Representative
Emerson:

Thank you for your
letter of March 20, in which you ask about the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) response to the language in the FY 1999 Omnibus Appropriations
act conference report (House Report 105-592), which concerned the quality
of information that Federal agencies disseminate to the public.

OMB is committed to
helping the Federal government provide the public with high quality information.
We work with the agencies in several ways to improve the quality of such
information. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act, we review information
collection proposals to ensure that they have maximum "practical utility."
We coordinate and review the development and use of federal statistics.
OMB Circular A-130 describes the best practice that agencies should follow
to collect and use timely and appropriate information. It also establishes
the criteria for agency budget requests to ensure that proposed information
management investments are appropriate, efficient, and effective.

The FY 1999 House
Report language urged OMB to establish government-wide rules for ensuring
the quality of federally-disseminated information. We appreciate the need
for ensuring such quality and are sensitive to the possibility that OMB
Circular A-130 might need to be updated or supplemented to deal with concerns
in this area. OMB Circular A-130 already establishes complaint resolution
procedures for perceived violations of data quality and other requirements
in the Circular. Section 9(a)10 of the Circular contains a requirement
that each agency CIO must:

"Monitor
agency compliance with the policies, procedures, and guidance in this
Circular. Acting as an ombudsman, the [CIO] shall consider alleged instances
of agency failure to comply with this Circular and recommend or take corrective
action as appropriate."

The Circular also
contains a specific requirement for agencies to report to OMB any alleged
violations and their resolution:

"The [CIO] shall report
annually, not later than February 1st of each year, to the
Director those instances of alleged failure to comply with this Circular
and their resolution." Last summer, OMB canvassed the agency Chief Information
Officers (CIOs) about data quality. They indicated to us that they have
not been hearing complaints about the quality of federally-disseminated
information. None expressed a need for further guidance in this area.
Based on our canvass of the CIOs and OMB's own experience, there does
not currently appear to be a significant problem in this area. We are
monitoring CIO activities and will be alert to any widespread complaints
about publicly-disseminated information.

At the present time,
OMB is not convinced that new "one-size-fits-all" rules will add much
to the existing OMB guidance and oversight activity and the procedures
followed by individual agencies. We are reluctant to issue more regulations
without a clear sense that they would be useful in promoting data quality.
We are also concerned that new regulations might prove counterproductive
to the goal of increasing data quality. The Report suggests that agencies
be required to establish a new "petition" process under which persons
could file formal "complaints" over the quality of information. These
administrative requirements could consume significant agency resources.
An adversarial petition process also might discourage the type of free
and open dialogue between the agency and the public that is crucial for
identifying and addressing data quality issues.

We also note that
the House Report suggests that any new regulations extend not only to
Federal agencies, but also to non-Federal entities that disseminate information
with Federal financial support, such as contractors, State and local governments,
and no-profit grantees. This might leads to new unfunded Federal mandates
and an intrusion into how non-Federal entities communicate with the public
on public matters.

We are very much interested
in exploring other ways to improve data quality. We believe it important
to have interagency cooperation in this regard and to enlist the public
in an ongoing dialogue aimed at improving such quality. Data quality is
one of many considerations of agency information management activity.
In that regard, we are launching this month an initiative to work with
select agencies (HCFA, EPA, DOT, HHS, OSHA, IRS, and SBA) and the public
on how we can collect information more effectively, with improved efficiency
and data quality. We expect these discussions to identify agency best
information management practices as well as recommendations for improving
specific information collection and management activities.

We appreciate your
strong interest in information quality and would welcome any further thoughts
you might have on this subject.

Sincerely,

John T. Spotila
Administrator

OMB Hosts Meeting as Part of New Data Quality
Initiative
On April 27-28th, OMB convened its first Federal Agency "Roundtables"
on "Collecting Information in the Information Age." The meeting, hosted
by OMB's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), was part
of a new initiative on improving the effectiveness and efficiency of federal
information collection. The initiative will focus on improving the quality
of the information the government collects, while minimizing the collection
burden, particularly through the use of information technology. The six
agencies participating in the meeting were: IRS, HCFA, OSHA, EPA, USDA,
and the Student Financial Assistance Office (Department of Education).
OMB also published a Federal Register notice inviting public comments
on this initiative, see 65 FR 25004, April 28, 2000 (link included in
CRE report, below).

Click
here to review a report on the first meeting of the OMB Data Quality
Initiative.

House Initiates Action on Data Quality
Based upon the recommendations of CRE, the House incorporated a Data
Quality provision in the report accompanying the FY 1999 Treasury and
General Government Appropriations Act (H.R. 4104) that urged OMB to
develop policy and procedural guidance to federal agencies in order
to ensure and maximize the "quality," "objectivity," "utility," and
"integrity" of information which the federal government disseminates
to the pubic. The Senate followed the House's lead, and relevant language
was included in the conference report to Pub. Law No. 105-277. The House
later included nearly identical mandatory language in the FY 2001 Treasury
and General Government Appropriations Act (H.R. 5658) which statutorily
directs OMB to issue guidelines for Data Quality, and this provision
has been incorporated into the FY 2001 Consolidated Appropriations Act
(H.R. 4577). CRE anticipates passage of this important provision that
will set government-wide standards for information quality, including
opportunity to petition agencies for correction of information that
does not meet such standards.

Click here
to read more, including the Data Quality language from the FY 1999 House
bill and Conference Report, the FY 2001 House bill and Conference Report,
as well as CRE's Legislative Working Papers on Data Access and Data Quality.

Representative Emerson Issues Letter
Asking OMB for Update on Data Quality Regulations and a Response to
the CRE Draft Data Quality Rule
In a March 20th letter, Representative Jo Ann Emerson (R-MO) asked John
Spotila, Director of OMB’s Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, for an update on its progress in issuing Data Quality regulations.
In House Report 105-592, incorporated as part of the FY 1999 Omnibus
Appropriations Act (P.L. 105-277), Congress had urged OMB develop a
rule which would define quality standards for government information
and to create a petition mechanism for the public to seek correction
of information which does not meet the OMB standards. Such regulations
were to be issued by September 30, 1999, but to date, OMB has taken
no action thereon. OMB was also asked for its reaction to the CRE draft
Data Quality regulation.

In the letter, Rep. Emerson promised to raise these issues at the March
28th hearing of the House Appropriations Committee’s Subcommittee
on Treasury, Postal Service, and General Government, which dealt with
OMB’s FY 2001 appropriations request. At that hearing, Rep. Emerson
questioned OMB Director Jacob Lew on the points raised in the letter.

CRE Proposes Draft Data Quality Regulation
Pursuant to the FY 1999 Omnibus Appropriations Act, Congress directed
OMB to develop a regulation to ensure the "Quality, Objectivity, Utility,
and Integrity" of information used or disseminated by the federal government.
The rule shall include a public petition process for correction of agency
information which does not meet the standards laid out in the OMB rule.
To date, OMB has taken no action on the regulation.
CRE has developed its own draft Data Quality regulation to assist OMB
in meeting its mandate from Congress. CRE invites public comment on
the proposed regulation, which will be considered in drafting the final
version to be shared with OMB.